Kotak Mahindra Bank v. Sanjay Kumar Tyagi And Another

  



IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH.

CR 624 of 2020 Date of Decision: February 10, 2020 Kotak Mahindra Bank -..Petitioner Vs.

Sanjay Kumar Tyagi and anr.

..Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU.

6.6 Present:6 Mr.Pawan, Advocate for Mr. Nitin Thatai, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Abhinav Sood, Advocate for Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for respondent No.1. None for respondent No.2, despite service through his counsel in terms of the order dated 29.01.2020, of this Court.

6.6
  

 Present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for directing learned trial Court to decide the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC within some time bound manner.

The prayer of the petitioner has been vehemently opposed by learned counsel for respondent No.1 on the ground that on last two occasions, adjournments were requested on behalf of the present petitioner before learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Panipat.

Heard both sides and perused the paper book.

Although this Court will not issue a mandate to the learned trial Court to decide the pending application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, in a time bound manner, but at the same time, in view SANJAY GUPTA 2020.02.13 10:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

     of the nature of the lis, it would be appropriate to proceed in the matter expeditiously without granting any unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties.

Consequently, the present petition is disposed off with a request to learned trial Court to dispose off the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC expeditiously, according to law, if there is no legal impediment.

February 10, 2020 (MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU) sanjay JUDGE Whether speaking/ reasoned:

Yes/ No.

Whether Reportable:

Yes/No.

SANJAY GUPTA 2020.02.13 10:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh